Particularism in Ethics

Philosophy ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Shiu-Hwa Tsu
Keyword(s):  
Moral Education ◽  
Essential Role ◽  
Practical Wisdom ◽  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Moral Truth ◽  
Late 20Th Century ◽  
Major Function ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Moral Metaphysics ◽  
Action Guidance

Particularism has certainly cut much ice with the development of analytical ethics since the late 20th century. Its proto-idea goes back at least to Aristotle, who maintains that the major function of practical wisdom is to discern the moral truth via a close examination of the situational particulars. Particularism’s contemporary prominence, on the other hand, is largely due to Jonathan Dancy, who endows the doctrine with much of its flesh and bones. Yet, in spite of this, no consensus has been reached on what exactly particularism amounts to. There are many versions of it. Roughly, they all take the basic line that moral principles of one sort or another play no essential role in the key areas of ethics. As a view about moral metaphysics, particularists maintain that the distinction between rightness and wrongness does not depend upon the existence of universal moral principles; instead, what is right or wrong is determined by the morally relevant particulars of the case before us. As a view about action guidance, particularists argue that the moral principles are, at best, nothing more than rules of thumb and, at worst, may lead us seriously astray. The key to making sound moral judgments lies in the exercise of moral sensitivity rather than in rule following. As a view about moral explanations and justifications, particularists contend that their ultimate sources lie in the particulars of the situations rather than in any universal moral principles. As a view about moral education, particularists oppose the idea that it consists essentially in the teaching of moral principles; rather, what really matters is the cultivation of moral vision. As a view about moral reason, particularists subscribe to ‘reason holism,’ the view that what is a reason for in one context may not be so in another, or may even turn out to be a reason against. Particularists reject the contrary doctrine of ‘reason atomism,’ the idea that each reason behaves in the same principled way on any occasion. In each of these key areas in ethics, there can be a version of particularism in support of the view that moral principles do not play an essential role. And there can be a version of ‘principlism,’ or what is sometimes called ‘generalism,’ that denies it. This article provides a survey of the major issues involved in the debate between the particularists and the so-called generalists or principlists.

scholarly journals On James Sterba’s Refutation of Theistic Arguments to Justify Suffering

Religions ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 64
Author(s):  
Bruce R. Reichenbach
Keyword(s):  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Recent Book ◽  
Middle Ground ◽  
Moral Decision Making ◽  
Existence Of God ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Divine Intervention ◽  
Horrendous Evils ◽  
Consistent Application ◽  
Moral Requirements

In his recent book Is a Good God Logically Possible? and article by the same name, James Sterba argued that the existence of significant and horrendous evils, both moral and natural, is incompatible with the existence of God. He advances the discussion by invoking three moral requirements and by creating an analogy with how the just state would address such evils, while protecting significant freedoms and rights to which all are entitled. I respond that his argument has important ambiguities and that consistent application of his moral principles will require that God remove all moral and natural evils. This would deleteriously restrict not only human moral decision making, but also the knowledge necessary to make moral judgments. He replies to this critique by appealing to the possibility of limited divine intervention, to which I rejoin with reasons why his middle ground is not viable.

Moral Truth

Dialogue ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-452
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Moral Truth ◽  
Truth Claims

Is worrying about whether moral judgments are true or false a philosophical waste of time? It can seem to be if moral truth claims are redundant on thejudgments they claim to be true. If to claim that the judgment “x is wrong” is true is simply to judge x wrong, anyone who is prepared to make judgments can consistently make truth claims. A concern for moral truth is then merely a concern for whether anything is right or wrong, not a separable concern for whether moral judgments are true or false.

Normative Principles are Synthetic A Priori

Episteme ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 367-383
Author(s):  
Paul Boghossian
Keyword(s):  
A Priori ◽  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Moral Principle ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Justified Belief ◽  
Normative Concepts ◽  
Open Question Argument ◽  
Moral Domains ◽  
And Mathematics ◽  
Open Question

AbstractI argue for the claim that there are instances of a priori justified belief – in particular, justified belief in moral principles – that are not analytic, i.e., that cannot be explained solely by the understanding we have of their propositions. §1–2 provides the background necessary for understanding this claim: in particular, it distinguishes between two ways a proposition can be analytic, Basis and Constitutive, and provides the general form of a moral principle. §§3–5 consider whether Hume's Law, properly interpreted, can be established by Moore's Open Question Argument, and concludes that it cannot: while Moore's argument – appropriately modified – is effective against the idea that moral judgments are either (i) reductively analyzable or (ii) Constitutive-analytic, a different argument is needed to show that they are not (iii) Basis-analytic. Such an argument is supplied in §6. §§7–8 conclude by considering how these considerations bear on recent discussions of “alternative normative concepts”, on the epistemology of intuitions, and on the differences between disagreement in moral domains and in other a priori domains such as logic and mathematics.

Folklorisation and the Emergent Moral Degeneration: A Functionalist Approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Siziwe Mandubu
Keyword(s):  
Young People ◽  
South African ◽  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Behavioral Norms ◽  
South African Society ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Societal Norms ◽  
Moral Standards ◽  
The Social ◽  
Functionalist Approach

Living in an egalitarian society has resulted in the corrosion of the moral base among certain sectors in the community. Some people misconstrue egalitarianism as an authorisation to act as they see fit. Young people, in particular, are gradually losing touch with reality in relation to acceptable behavioral norms in the South African society. Based on the functionalist theory of balancing the social equilibrium among people, the article delineates moral standards as the most fundamental and general principles of behaviour and reflects on how the society expects one to act in certain situations. The article, therefore, explores the primary concepts within functionalism and attempts to outline that the society is a system of interconnected parts that work together in harmony to maintain a state of stability and social cohesion. The article will use the folktale “uDyakalashe noMvolofu” (“The Jackal and the Wolf”) to reflect on the expected societal norms. It demonstrates that folktales, which used to transfer values, morals and shape the conduct of people in the olden days are still appropriate in reshaping the outlook and perceptions of today’s generation. As such, the shrewd nature of folklore in the moral regeneration of the current generation of young people is exposed. While there are many folktales in this category, “uDyakalashe noMvolofu” (“The Jackal and the Wolf”) provides the theme relevant for the analysis of the topic to highlight that moral standards generate moral principles and moral judgments.

PP130 Nudging In Public Health: Accountability For Practical Wisdom

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (S1) ◽  
pp. 133-134
Author(s):  
Michal Stanak
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Maker ◽  
Narrative Analysis ◽  
Practical Wisdom ◽  
Health Gain ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Public Health Decision ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Health Decision ◽  
Public Scrutiny

INTRODUCTION:Nudging is the application of behavioural sciences aimed at influencing behaviour in a non-prescriptive way. It is a tool of public health decision makers to produce health gain. Just like decisions in the field of Health Technology Assessment (HTA), nudging decisions are inevitably value laden. The current European Network for HTA (EUnetHTA) approach to evaluate ethical aspects encompasses mainly utilitarian and principlistic approaches. The aim of this project is to incorporate the virtue ethics approach in public health decision-making processes based on the example of nudging.METHODS:The narrative analysis of nudging is based on a systematic literature search conducted from 28 October to 13 November 2015 in the following databases: Medline via Ovid, Embase, and TRIP Database. A total of sixty-two articles were listed as relevant as a result of searches and, in addition, twenty-five more articles were found through hand searching.RESULTS:Regardless of the potential issues related to nudging (manipulation or coercion), nudging is considered cost-effective and inevitable because of the malleability of human psychology for example, alcoholic drinks served in smaller glasses nudge people to drink less alcohol.No policy intervention, nudging or HTA, is value neutral and hence it requires an ethical evaluation. It takes traits of character, virtues, to discern which principle to apply in what circumstances and phronesis, practical wisdom, is the key virtue of a decision maker. Phronesis is not a moral judgement deduced from principles, but it is context specific, bottom-up, action orientated, and framed through dialogues. It focuses on the agent, the decision maker, who, via the use public scrutiny, should be held accountable for phronetic decisions made.CONCLUSIONS:Nudging is a cost-effective tool that can improve the populations health in a non-prescriptive way. Transparent reporting open to public scrutiny is necessary for the sake of evaluating whether the decisions made were phronetic for it takes traits of character, virtues, to decide between competing moral principles.

scholarly journals The Necessity of Moral Principles in Moral Education

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
EJ Udokang
Keyword(s):  
Moral Education ◽  
The Other ◽  
Analytic Method ◽  
Self Directed Learning ◽  
Proper Place ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Directed Learning ◽  
The One

Many well-meaning parents and teachers are hamstrung in their attempts at moral education of their children and wards. Hence they are caught in some dilemma. On the one hand, if they incline toward the code of conception, they tend to be authoritarian in their approach; if, on the other hand, they favour some variant of the romantic reaction, they may expect that children will go it alone and decide it all for themselves. To overcome this dilemma, there is need for a synthesis of both alternatives. It is precisely the synthesis of these two positions (principles and creativity) that we propose to explore in this paper as a preliminary to any discussion on moral education. With analytic method as a tool, the paper concludes that until a more adequate view of morality which embroils the proper place for both authority and self-directed learning is synthesized, a discourse on moral education will be of no good.

scholarly journals The ethics of narrative art: Philosophy in schools, compassion and learning from stories

2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura D'Olimpio ◽  
Andrew Peterson
Keyword(s):  
Moral Education ◽  
Practical Wisdom ◽  
Alasdair Macintyre ◽  
Philosophy For Children ◽  
Fictional World ◽  
Narrative Art ◽  
Moral Agents ◽  
Philosophical Dialogue ◽  
Art Philosophy ◽  
Student Questions

Following neo-Aristotelians Alasdair MacIntyre and Martha Nussbaum, we claim that humans are story-telling animals who learn from the stories of diverse others. Moral agents use rational emotions, such as compassion, which is our focus here, to imaginatively reconstruct others’ thoughts, feelings and goals. In turn, this imaginative reconstruction plays a crucial role in deliberating and discerning how to act. A body of literature has developed in support of the role narrative artworks (i.e. novels and films) can play in allowing us the opportunity to engage imaginatively and sympathetically with diverse characters and scenarios in a safe protected space that is created by the fictional world. By practising what Nussbaum calls a ‘loving attitude’, her version of ethical attention, we can form virtuous habits that lead to phronesis (practical wisdom). In this paper, and taking compassion as an illustrative focus, we examine the ways that students’ moral education might usefully develop from engaging with narrative artworks through Philosophy for Children (P4C), where philosophy is a praxis, conducted in a classroom setting using a Community of Inquiry (CoI). We argue that narrative artworks provide useful stimulus material to engage students, generate student questions, and motivate philosophical dialogue and the formation of good habits, which, in turn, supports the argument for philosophy to be taught in schools.

scholarly journals Defusing the Regress Challenge to Debunking Arguments

2020 ◽  
Vol 50 (6) ◽  
pp. 785-800
Author(s):  
Shang Long Yeo
Keyword(s):  
Moral Judgments ◽  
Moral Truth ◽  
Debunking Arguments

AbstractsA debunking argument contends that some target moral judgments were produced by unreliable processes and concludes that such judgments are unjustified. Debunking arguments face a regress challenge: to show that a process is unreliable at tracking the moral truth, we need to rely on other moral judgments. But we must show that these relied-upon judgments are also reliable, which requires yet a further set of judgments, whose reliability needs to be confirmed too, and so on. Some argue that the debunker faces an insurmountable regress, which disables the debunking conclusion. In this paper, I explore and defuse this regress challenge.

scholarly journals Law’s Autonomy and Moral Reason

Laws ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 6
Author(s):  
Jack Clayton Thompson
Keyword(s):  
Practical Reason ◽  
Practical Reasoning ◽  
Moral Values ◽  
Moral Truth ◽  
Moral Reason ◽  
Moral Principles ◽  
Legal Positivist ◽  
Law And Morality ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Concept Of Law

This paper intends to set out an argument to Legal Idealism and a thesis that holds law and morality as necessarily connected. My focus is on deconstructing the Positivist argument to the Autonomy Thesis and beginning to reconstruct it through the application of morality to law’s autonomous authority. My aim, ultimately, is to demonstrate how, through the concept of law, practical reason might explain the related (and overlapping) notions of legitimacy, authority, and the obligation to obey through the necessary connection of law and morality. That is, I intend to demonstrate that morality both survives and remains identifiable (transparently) following the process of metamorphosis into institutionalised practical reasoning. If this is so, the authority of and obligation to law is simultaneously a form of morally rational obligation. In the response to the Positivist argument that moral values are incommensurate, I will show that this commensurability can be determined ‘artificially’ by a system of institutionalised reasoning (i.e., the law); this is to say, if I can show that the Legal Positivist argument is left incomplete without some explanation of moral values underpinning it, I need not to show that a specific, defensible moral truth or principle is required, but that an artificial weighting of abstract moral principles is sufficient

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document